Part OneWelcome to Manhattan Beach
Paul Bynum graduated from college in 1972 and joined the
Hermosa Beach police department a year later. At 31 he was
promoted to the rank of chief detective. Bynum was not a
traditional investigator. One fellow detective often thought he
was "too bright to be a cop." Off duty, he drove an MG and mixed
with the '60s survivors at the Sweetwater Cafe.
In 1976 Bynum was assigned the investigation of the Karen
Klaas murder. Klaas was the divorced wife of Bill Medley, a
vocalist for the Righteous Brothers. She was raped and murdered
one morning about an hour after dropping her five-year-old son
off at the McMartin preschool in Manhattan Beach.
Neighbors told police they'd been alarmed at the sight of
a menacing stranger before the murder wandering through the
neighborhood. Police later entertained speculation that Klaas had
been stalked. Throughout the week her body was found, this same
stranger had popped up several times on her corner. A neighbor
phoned Karen to warn her. She didn't answer. When friends entered
the back door of the house, concerned for her safety, they found
a Caucasian male with a beard, about 5'7", 28 years old, dressed
in a long olive green coat with a tunic collar and boots. He was
leaving through the front door. Klaas was found naked and
unconscious. She died five days later. Nothing was stolen. Police
had no indication that Klaas knew the man who assaulted her.
In 1984, shortly after indictments were handed to
defendants in the McMartin child molestation case, Gerald Klaas,
her husband, drove off a cliff in Oregon and was killed. Children
alleged in a grand jury hearing that teachers at the preschool
had threatened to kill family members if they talked about abuse,
It was rumored around town that the Klaas deaths and the McMartin
case may have been related.
But police said no. "We have no leads, no suspects and
we're not coordinating with Manhattan Beach," Hermosa Beach Lt.
Mike Lavin told reporters.1
In 1979, Paul Bynum was forced out of the police
department without an explanation despite an unblemished record.
After Bynum had wrapped up an investigation of a series of
murders of teenage girls in nearby Redondo Beach, culminating in
the arrest and conviction of serial killers Roy Norris and
Lawrence Bittaker, police chief Frank Beeson pressured Bynum to
take a stress leave. Bynum was haunted by the serial murder
investigation, but remained confident in his emotional stability.
He refused the leave. The chief obtained an order from the city
manager, and Bynum was forced out on an indefinite disability
leave.
He chalked it up to internal politics, "paranoia."
"When the papers reported that Beeson had shown up
apparently drunk at his first Hermosa council meeting and dropped
his revolver on the floor," Bynum told reporter Kevin Cody, "he
thought we had tipped reporters." Beeson was unaware that
reporters routinely attended meetings of the city council.2
Bynum set out on a new career as a private investigator.
In March 1984, he was retained by the Buckeys' defense attorney,
Danny Davis, and in the course of his investigation came to the
conclusion that children had been abused at the preschool. He
found the video-taped interviews of the children by child
therapists "credible." One afternoon, Cody informed Bynum that
hundreds of children had alleged molestation took place at the
preschool. Bynum was shocked. He stammered he had no idea so many
children were involved.
In 1986 he was called to testify at the trial of Ray
Buckey by prosecutor Lael Rubin. The morning he was to appear, a
juror's home was burglarized, and Bynum's testimony was
rescheduled for the next morning.
"Neither side is going to like what I have to say," he
told Cody. For one thing, there was the matter of Bynum's lost
citation books, records he'd kept while a detective in Hermosa
Beach. When the police arrested Ray Buckey on molestation
charges, the "lost" books were discovered on the preschool
attendent's desk. What were official police records doing in
Buckey's home?
And Prosecutor Rubin had intended to ask Bynum about a
map turned up by DA investigators in March 1986, pin-pointing the
location of turtle shells Bynum had unearthed at the lot next to
the McMartin preschool. (The children claimed teachers had
killed turtles to demonstrate what would happen to them and their
families if they talked about the molestations. Bynum, while
retained by the defense, had managed to corroborate a key point
in the testimony of the children.)
Bynum's court appearance was preempted by "suicide,"
although the timing left some parents in the case convinced he'd
been murdered.3 His body was discovered by his wife at 5:45 in
the morning. He died of a head shot from a .38 caliber pistol.
"None of the half dozen people questioned who were close
to Bynum could think of any reason why his involvement in the
case might have driven him to suicide," reported the Easy Reader
in Manhattan Beach. "Paul was kind of a worrier," said Stephen
Kay, a deputy district attorney and friend of the Bynum family,
"but there was no hint of suicide. He was very upbeat about his
wife and new daughter, both of whom he adored."4
The belief that Bynum had been murdered was fueled by the
memory of another odd death, the alcohol toxicity that claimed
the life of Judy Johnson. She was the first mother to speak
publicly about child molestation at McMartin and sympathizers of
the Buckeys in the press have gone to great lengths to portray
Johnson as "crazy." Her life was inverted the day her son came
home from the McMartin school, bleeding. Strangers entered her
life, intimidated her. She lived in fear, and felt it necessary
to keep a gun in the house. Her estranged husband turned hostile.
Paranoia led her to believe him a perpetrator. She took to
alcohol. She was allergic to alcohol. It poisoned her.
The death of Judy Johnson was met with howls of laughter
in greater Los Angeles. She will be remembered as the delusional
paranoiac who set in motion a wave of "hysteria" carried through
Southern California by a sensational press and out across the
plains, contaminating lives and decimating families everywhere. A
groundless witch-hunt. This was the explanation doled out by
"experts" from leading universities.
Nevertheless, children who attended the preschool still
insist they were abused. And the detailed memories of their
parents are sharply at odds with the simple caricature of the
case repeated endlessly in the press. They recall not suggestive
questioning, but the long hours of testimony by dozens of
children, the telephoned death threats, how some of the children
suffered deep emotional problems requiring hospitalization.
Knowing child pornography to be a highly lucrative business, they
frown at the snickering over the childrens' disclosures that they
were forced to play "naked movie-star" games. They haven't put
aside as freak accident the first exhibit in the case, a
physician's report that one of the children suffered "blunt force
trauma" of sexual areas.5 The parents were left to ponder why
some of the toddlers in the care of the McMartins had chlamydia,
a sexually-transmitted infection.6
Where was the humor in all of this?

Open Season
The parents wondered, like everyone else, at the
incredibility of the charges -- yet they had to question Peggy
McMartin's testimony that she only worked at the school for a
short time, when payroll records showed that she had been
employed there for years. To the families, the final verdict of
Ray Buckey meant it was now "open season on children."
And the press opened fire. The world was told redundantly
that ABC's Wayne Satz, the reporter who broke the case (killed by
a heart attack at 41), and Kee MacFarlane, a therapist testifying
for the prosecution, had an affair, as if this had any bearing on
the allegations of the children. Even Oliver Stone, perhaps in
ignorance, took to the bandwagon with a film made for HBO,
written by Abby Mann, theorizing that hysteria in Manhattan Beach
was kindled when one child returned home from school one
afternoon with "a red bottom" -- this would be the son of Judy
Johnson, and he hadn't been spanked -- he was bleeding from the
anus.
This hardly constitutes media "spin." It is a conscious
participation in a felony. The account of the case pounded into
collective memory by media repetition goes that far to distort
the facts. The widespread media coverage was, according to Los
Angeles Times editor Noel Greenwood, "a mean-spirited campaign"
organized to discredit the children and their therapists.7
But why should certain members of the corporate press,
and segments of the legal and psychiatric professions, go to such
lengths to suppress evidence of organized child abuse at
McMartin?
The traumatic crimes reported by the toddlers bear an
uncanny resemblance to mind control programming, a specialty of
certain classified federal agencies and cult cut-outs on the
black budget payroll.8
The children are often ridiculed because some of their
charges are impossible. Tunnels under the preschool? Too
ludicrous to consider. But as it happens, there were tunnels,
confirmed in 1993 by a team of five scientists from leading
universities.
The unearthing of the tunnels, like much of the critical
evidence, never made it to the courtroom. They have been
discreetly excluded from newspaper accounts.
Filling the void, Debbie Nathan, a widely published
skeptic of ritual abuse, heaped ridicule on the tunnel
allegations in the Village Voice in June 1990. She maintained the
McMartin site had already been "painstakingly probed for tunnels.
None were found."9 Nathan's account is a fabrication. In fact,
recalls Dr. Roland Summit, who contributed to the final report on
the tunnel excavation, parents started digging and prosecutors,
reluctantly forced to a showdown, "commissioned a superficial
search of open terrain." District Attorney Ira Reiner then
declared the tunnel stories unfounded "without going under the
concrete floor of the preschool." Once the tunnels were
officially discounted, attempts to explore for an underground
reality were instant targets for ridicule."10
Archaeologist Gary Stickel was retained to lead the
excavation on the re-commendation of Dr. Rainier Berger, chairman
of UCLA's Interdisciplinary Archeology Program, by parents of
McMartin children.11 Initially Stickel sided with the Buckeys,
believing the abuse allegations to be so much moonlight for
hysterics. However, he'd heard of late homicide detective Paul
Bynum, the first to dig at the site:

Bynum apparently conducted his informal digging in
February, 1984 (Daily Breeze, 1987). It is significant to note
he did unearth some buried animal remains, "numerous pieces of
tortoise shells and bones" (Daily Breeze, 1987). "There was keen
interest at the time since it was reported that the children
testified that tortoises, rabbits, and other small animals were
mutilated to terrorize the children into keeping silent" (Daily
Breeze, 1987).12

But "experts" courted by the press snaffled at the
suggestion that animals were killed to frighten children at
McMartin and other preschools around the country. It was not
until 1993 that a study by the National Center for Child Abuse
and Neglect confirmed that children are not only threatened in
day care settings, "most threats are very specific in terms of
what the consequence of disclosure will be and how the threat
will be carried out.... The use of such severe threats is
obviously quite frightening to young children and is effective in
preventing disclosure. In fact, it appears that threats used in
day care center cases may go beyond what is usually needed to
silence victims, and may in some instances be made for purposes
of psychological terror in and of itself."13

Into the Grotto
Most reporters in Southern California pooh-poohed
evidence of coercion, but there was a great, gaping silence when
the tunnels were found.
"I asked my daughter," recalls Jackie MacGauley, a mother
of two children who attended the preschool, "'How could they have
taken you to these places without being seen?' And she answered
me as though I was silly to ask such a question. She said,
'Through the tunnels, of course.'"
The Los Angeles Times ran a spate of features poking fun
of the excavation team until actual evidence of tunnels was
discovered. Then the Times ran a brief news item, one paragraph
long, dryly noting that "evidence" of tunnels had been found, and
never mentioned the subject again. The local Beach Reporter
covered the story without a blush: "parents began to dig with
shovels, allegedly in an area pointed out by a nine-year-old
former student of the McMartin preschool, who told them to dig
behind a cement planter in the northeast corner. When parents
unearthed several broken turtle shells and a few bones, they
stopped digging and notified the district attorney's office."15
Once the entrance was exposed, Stickel used remote
sensing equipment to read the terrain conductivity of the empty
lot next to the preschool. The survey was conducted by a
respected geophysicist, Robert Beer, working with an
electromagnetic scanner. The tunnel opening was found precisely
where children said it would be. Stickel: "Some of the children
had stated there had been animal cages placed along that wall and
that they had entered a tunnel under the cages." A foreign soil
deposit was found near the foundation. Clearing the anomaly with
a backhoe, they found the roots of an avocado tree cut to clear a
path for the tunnel. The roots had been cut with a hand saw and
torn away, and shreds dangled on either wall of the tunnel.
That's the moment editors at the Times chose to pull
reporters off the story. All other news outlets rapidly followed
suit.
But the excavators cleared the foreign soil and followed
the tunnel anyway. It "meandered under Classroom No. 4 and then
most of Classroom No. 3.... There is no other scenario that fits
all of the facts except that the feature was indeed a tunnel,"
they concluded. "The date of the construction and use of the
tunnel was not absolutely established, but an assessment of seven
factors of data all indicate that it was probably constructed,
used and completely filled back in sometime after 1966 (the
construction date of the preschool)."15
Dr. E. Michael, a specialist in forensic geology in
Malibu, was called to examine a cavity in the underground
passage. Together with Dr. Herbert Adams of the geology
department at Cal State University, a ground resistivity reading
of the tunnel was followed from the preschool to a triplex next
door, a traversing section parallel to the north wall of the
school, 5 feet away, extending 20 feet eastward, 10 to 15 feet
beneath the surface.16
Gerald Hobbs, a local tree surgeon for 25 years, did much
of the actual digging. Hobbs:

The children had told two different stories about this
tunnel prior to the dig. One, that they had gone through the
tunnel and came up in the house next door, and two, they had come
up in the garage, which blocked the house from the street. At any
rate, the tunnel went in that direction.... That evening I went
to the house next door and followed the walk between the school
and the house, only about 4-1/2 feet apart. I went about 30 feet
down between the buildings and found a crawl space under the
house. I bellied my way toward the southwest corner of the house.
After going about 20 feet, I found an area inside the west wall
of the house where the floor was cut out. If I remember
correctly, the area of floor that was missing was 36" X 38" X
41".16

A total of 77 animal bones were found buried at the
McMartin site, an assortment of the osteo-remains of domestic
cattle, chickens, dogs and a single rabbit.17
However, Debbie Nathan, the hide-bound "skeptic" of
ritual abuse, a scion of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation,
told another story. The McMartin site, she insisted, had already
been "painstakingly probed for tunnels" by the D.A.'s office.
(Not so, as we've seen). "None were found. [The McMartin] parents
have invested years believing in demonic conspiracies and
underground nursery tunnels. (Until recently the parents were
still digging. They came up with Indian artifacts)." No mention
of Bynum's independent findings. No mention of the dig as it
happened in the real world. She reserves much of her scorn for
former FBI agent Ted Gunderson and Jackie MacGauley. Nathan seems
not to realize that Gunderson and MacGauley brought in Stickel
and his geological team to defuse accusations they were directly
engaged in the dig. They weren't. The search for the tunnels was
independent, and scores of volunteers pitched in.
Nathan's refrain of "no evidence" is hollow. She has
been known to contort around the facts of ritual abuse in a
grotesque parody of journalism and is frequently blind to
critical evidence. Nathan continues to find "no evidence" of
abuse at McMartin despite the nightmares, the acting-out, medical
molestation reports and sexual infections. The tunnel excavation,
she assures with psychic certainty (and a sniff of
condescension), is a "hoax."
To come to the point: Nathan's propaganda, repeated in
the New York Times and a host of other corporate publications,
happened to conceal a classified mind control operation the CIA
and Pentagon had undertaken thirty years before....

Federally funded biomedical and behavioral research has
resulted in major advances in health care and improved the
quality of life for all Americans.

- Bill Clinton
February 17, 1994

Bad Apples
Intelligence officials squirm through hard questions so
gracefully that their appearance at investigative hearings is
always lively with congressmen bellowing in outraged disbelief at
their agility. A spy is a liar by definition, so no one listened
in 1964 when CIA director Richard Helms, in a letter to the
Warren Commission, made reference to Langley's interest in a
cyborgean form of "biological radio communication"
"Cybernetics," Helms explained, "can be used in molding
of a child's character ... the amassing of experience, the
establishment of social behavior patterns..." -- What was that?
Machines? Molding character? No one at the Warren Commission
thought to ask the CIA official what the devil he was talking
about -- "... control of the growth processes of the
individual..."1
Helms wasn't a lunatic. At McGill University, Georgetown,
Cornell and some 40 other upper-tier academic institutions around
the country, psychiatrists and engineers on the CIA payroll R&D'd
the technology of remote "biological communication." The
breathtaking potential of the devices, however, has been marred
by the bloodthirsty protocol of CIA-military experimentation.
One subject of the experiments in the 1960s, a
psychologist living in Germany today recalled in a letter to the
Freedom of Thought Foundation, an organization of researchers and
subjects of CIA-DoD mind control experiments, his grim history as
a guinea pig. The experience was horrifyingly similar to the
abuse later described by hundreds of toddlers in southern
California. And he suggests how far-fetched cover stories (psi or
"psychic" spying experiments, "alien" abductions) routinely
conceal EM assaults on mind and personality:

The functions of torture ... associate the original
personality of the victim with pain, panic and horror -- the
desired personality is conditioned with pleasure afterwards, to
function as aversive conditioning to establish new behavior
patterns, establish a panic-controlled mechanism of amnesia ("If
you remember, you will try to betray us, but we will be informed
before you succeed in managing this, because we are everywhere,
then you will be tortured again, so you will not remember."),
produce an artificial, controlled multiple personality disorder
(which is, under natural conditions, a result of traumatization).
And by the way, torture itself, even if not combined with
mind control techniques, elicits amnestic disorders or memory
blocks.... With heavy electroshocks the victim is regressed to a
state of an infant. Then the torture resembles psychologically
the ill-treatment in childhood. Rape is common, too, as an
equivalent of sexual abuse in infancy.
Being a human robot means to be mentally ill, means to be
a person suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), the
difference between a "natural" MPD and a artificial,
mind-controlled MPD is that the latter was consciously tailored
by the controllers to whom the victim is tied by invisible
unconscious chains.
Many students in the field of psychology and psychiatry
don't believe that mind control is possible ... and that is
probably because they haven't understood the basic concept: MPD
produced by a stimulation of the natural conditions of its
causes. This is very important: Only if the natural conditions of
the causes of MPD are reproduced [will] a human robot work
reliably. And that is a "must" in all clandestine actions.
You may ask why I can be so sure. There are two reasons:
As a psychologist I know a little bit about the mechanisms of
mind and behavior, and I am a victim.
As far as I can remember I was the victim of a program
with the aim to delete my personality -- literally to dissolute
my personality and extract it from my nervous system. They told
me that I was sentenced to death and that they have found a
method to execute me, but leave my body alive. In short: They
tried to make a human robot or a slave out of me [with]:
* Classical hypnosis, drugs and so on.
* Electrical torture of my genitals. They used a device
which I call a torture trouser. This is a sort of loin-cloth made
of leather and steel bonds by which an electrode is fastened to
the genitals of the victim. For electric supply they use a cable
or a battery so that you can freely move and if the torturer
wants to torture you he sends an electric signal to the battery
using a transmitter. This is a very practical device for aversive
behavior modification....
* They gave me a drug that induces near-death
experiences. When I was clinically dead a voice suggested to me
that he was god and that he had decided that I have to be born
again as a slave. Then I was reanimated.
* They used electromagnetic fields to induce panic, fear,
depression and pleasure, by this means they conditioned me very
effectively. They used ESB too, but it was not so effective.
They even coagulated parts of my nucleus amygdala, but it wasn't
effective, too. They conditioned my EEG.
* They obviously have found a wavelength with hypnotic
effects so that they could give me posthypnotic orders. I wasn't
able not to obey.
* My memory was erased by electroshocks, radiation and
the described torture mechanism. As far as I can remember all
this happened between 1972 and 1982. There are some reminiscences
making me believe that the first manipulations started earlier,
1967. Some other reminiscences furnish some evidence that they
began to dissociate my mind when I was a little child living in
an orphanage, younger than three years old.
I am not a mad man. I am 43 years old. I am a
psychologist and a doctor of the economic and social sciences. I
am working for a network of facilities treating drug addicts, and
I am responsible for public relations. I am strongly convinced
that I am out of danger now. I don't know whether they used
modern electronic mind control methods. I can't believe that they
implanted brain transmitters into my skull, but who knows.
I don't know why they chose me for this program. There
are lots of more or less nonsensical cover stories ... being a
man from outer space, having dangerous paranormal (psi)
faculties, being able to unmask spies by using these methods....2

"Averse conditioning ... electric shocks ... rape is
common" -- years later, the McMartin children would also claim to
be "tied by invisible unconscious chains" to morbidly cruel
adults engaged in traumatic "clandestine actions." Another
survivor of the grim experiments in the 1960s has memories nearly
identical to those of the McMartin toddlers: "hypnosis,
electroshock, sensory deprivation, by isolation -- in closets, in
underground dirt rooms, in graves, underwater, death threats to
self, others and animals, use of drugs ... seduction and
blackmail."3
At the preliminary McMartin hearing, 14 children
testified for 88 days. They described 45 threats to them and
their parents.4 The tactic is debated. One psychologist will
frown at threatening children. Another will dismiss the very
mention of death threats as a hysterical aberration or a "false
memory."
Guess which psychologist has a classified resume ...

Virtual Hell
Walter Urban, a defense attorney for the Buckeys, told
New York Times reporter David Hechler in 1988 the "stories" of
children at McMartin were impossible to believe. "Such as: 'I was
molested." Where did it occur? 'In a hot-air balloon over the
desert.' 'In a speed boat, where sharks were all around, and they
told us that we were going to be thrown to the sharks if we
didn't agree to be molested.' That kind of stuff."5 Other
children swore they'd witnessed teachers at the preschool flying.
Children say the darnedest things. Of course, anyone with
a gram of sense rejects these claims out of hand. Then again ...
Chris de Nicola would keep Amnesty International's entire
staff occupied for a year. Born in July, 1962, Nicola was used at
the age of four in federally-sponsored hypnotic imaging
experiments at Kansas City University. "I was strapped down," she
recalls. A doctor festooned her head and body with electrodes,
"used what looked like an overhead projector and repeatedly said
he was burning different images into my brain while a red light
flashed, aimed at my forehead. In between each sequence he used
electric shock on my body and told me to go deeper and deeper
while repeating each image would go deeper into my brain, and I
would do whatever he told me to do. I felt drugged because he had
given me a shot before he started the procedure. When it was
over, he gave me another shot. The next thing I remember I was
with my grandparents again in Tucson."6 (The McMartin children
also spoke of adults slipping them drugs, and electric-convulsive
shocks are a recurrent theme of intelligence-cult abuse claims.)
The "doctor" in this instance was L. Wilson Greene; with a little
research, the girl's therapist discovered with a little research
that a man with this name was the scientific director of the
chemical and radiological lab at the Army Chemical Center.7
Children forced to be used in the experiments have spoken
of wearing virtual-reality goggles. Thirty years after the
barbaric treatment Nicola received, the beaming of images to the
visual cortex is stock-and-trade stuff to the microwave mafia.
The virtual-reality goggles were described by child mind control
subject well before they were commercialized. The children
reported that there were made to view threatening images, or
convinced them they'd taken part in murder, cannibalism and other
horrific crimes.8
In January 1996, the full-grown director of a support
group for ritually abused children in Los Angeles (she has worked
closely with the families in the McMartin case) discovered
firsthand what happened at the preschool when the local mind
control team targeted her for torture from a remote source. The
experience began with a splitting headache, "like needles" boring
into her cranium. The attack continued for seven or eight hours.
She was reduced to screaming and crying and took to bed. When she
closed her eyes, her head was filled with images of figures in
robes moving in a circle. She opened her eyes and the figures
still swarmed in the darkness in front of her. She switched on
the light. The image was still there.9
She wasn't hallucinating. And the McMartin children
weren't suffering "false memories." These days, the images --
frequently combined with an electronic form of hypnosis -- are
projected to the brain's visual pathways, received with perfect
clarity.
There are innumerable examples of helpless private
citizens who've had the misfortune to fall prey to the whims of
the mind control fraternity.
One of them was Patrick Warden, a high-potential
high-achiever who scored in the 98th percentile of his high
school intelligence test in 1969, an accomplishment he repeated
on his graduate record exam at the University of California at
Berkeley. In 1980 a CIA recruiter approached him. In short order,
invasive "voices" came to him. Warden was told the Agency wanted
him to become a public relations officer for the agency's "mental
telepathy system." The "system," he discovered by scouring
obscure biomedical journals and the few books on CIA mind control
available, is "operational," employing "technology that operates
apparently by radio and microwaves, and can broadcast voices and
visual images, including somatic sensations, and affect the
autonomic nervous system across distances.... Though in its
primitive form the MTS mimics psychic phenomena, it involves
man-made technology."10
The are innumerable instances of ritual abuse accompanied
by exotic "psychic" images, voices, sensations, special effects
of the type generated by technology described in documented
histories of CIA mind control. Consider the case of Chad Ingram,
the son of confessed ritual abuser Paul Ingram of Olympia,
Washington. Lawrence Wright, in a 1993 New Yorker feature that
attempted to debunk ritual abuse and exonerate Ingram based on
opinions of psychologists from the False Memory Syndrome
Foundation. The shrinks dismissed the boy's memories of abuse
out-of-hand because "he had heard voices in his head."11
Impossible? A doctor at one of Stockholm's most
prestigious hospitals acknowledges that young children were used
for experiments involving advanced mind control technology to
evaluate their "thought activity and reactions."12 This line of
R&D quite naturally evolved into tinkering with the transmission
of virtual-reality images and voices to the brain.
The devices have been around for decades. And they
weren't produced in the dog-star cluster, shipped by flying
saucer to earth, though the CIA, military intelligence sector and
certain psychologists (with a CIA pedigree) have convinced
hundreds of millions that "aliens" come from untold light-years
away to stick CIA implants in our heads, the most unbelievable
cover story ever told -- one passionately defended by many of the
same skeptics who drown allegations of ritual abuse -- the
torture of children -- in condescending snorts of laughter, and
pride themselves on rational thinking. (But then, about 70% of
the human brain is composed of fat.)
Richard Helms wasn't betraying his own deepest ambitions
when he told the Warren Commission of the Agency's experiments in
"molding a child's character" with cybernetics.

9. Interview with author, January 24, 1996. Compare this
virtual-reality vision with the memory of Paul Ingram in the
Olympia, Washington ritual abuse case: "Ingram began seeing
people in robes kneeling around a fire. He thought he saw a
corpse." Lawrence Wright, "Remembering Satan - Part I," The New
Yorker, May 17, 1993, p. 73.

11. Wright, p. 74. Often, as our German subject notes,
post-hypnotic suggestion is used to dissolve a child's memory of
the trauma, protecting the identities of his tormentors. It's
fairly common for a subject to resort to self-mutilation, a
post-hypnotic command, when recalling blocked memories of
childhood abuse in therapy sessions, according to Los Angeles
child therapist Catherine Gould. Such programming could explain
the sudden illness of Chad Ingram when confronting certain
memories: "Chad produced a memory of being assaulted by Ray Risch
[a mechanic for the Washington state police and a cohort of the
boy's father] in the basement of Ingrams' house when he was ten
or twelve years old. At this point, Chad leaned forward 'in a
trance-like state.' Sometimes he would go off for 5-10 minutes
without saying anything." Wright, p. 77.
"A major part of the mind control experimentation [on
children] was involved in wiping out the memory of the subject
through electric shock, trauma and drugs." - Valerie Wolf, report
to Clinton's Commission on Radiation, March 12, 1995, p. 4.

12. Robert Naeslund, a victim of Swedish mind control
research, original ms. of Brain Transmitter, a privately-printed
expose.

Back issues of the MindNet Journal are available at our
FTP Archive site:

[/pub/users/vericomm/mindnet/]

Submission of articles for publication within the MindNet
Journal on the subjects of mind control, directed-energy
weapons, non-lethal weapons, ritual abuse, UFO abductions,
bioelectromagnetics, hypnosis, and other related topics
will be accepted with the author's statement of permission
to publish. The editor reserves the right to accept or
reject for publication. Send articles for submission to: